tv [untitled] December 5, 2012 10:00pm-10:30pm EST
well john harwood in washington d.c. and here's what's coming up tonight on the big picture why republicans so worried about the united nations taking over our government and they really think a defunct nonprofit group helped steal the election for president obama all that more in tonight's lone liberal rumble and thousands of men women and children die every year as a result of senseless and completely preventable gun violence but have we become a nation that's afraid to talk about guns and to create the laws that are needed to effectively regulate that will protect american lives.
you need to know this paranoid delusions swept the floor of the united states senate on tuesday as a group of republican senators blocked ratification of a u.n. treaty to help disabled people around the planet the convention on the rights of persons with disabilities requires signatory u.n. nations to provide for disabled populations in the exact same way as does the american one nine hundred ninety americans with disabilities act the treaty would require absolutely no changes to current u.s. law suite already passed the american americans with disabilities act more than twenty years ago it simply calls on other nations to adopt these same american standards. standards that were signed in place by president george w.
bush in two thousand and six and then resigned by president obama in two thousand and nine this was championed by former republican senator bob dole himself disabled who was wheeled onto the senate floor for the vote and witnessed senator kerry's passionate speech. what we do here in the united states senate matters not just to us but to people all across the globe and maybe some people here need to be reminded of that please don't let it happen brzezinski down don't let senator bob dole down most importantly don't let the senate and the country down approve this treaty. the treaty was also supported by republicans john mccain dick lugar and john barrasso receive sixty one votes in the senate a clear majority are over treaty ratification requires a two thirds majority sixty six votes and thirty eight republicans including senators jim de mint mike lee and marco rubio joined together to block it out of fear that it threatens the sovereignty of the united states even though again the
treaty would require no changes to u.s. laws since our nation already passed laws to assist the disabled on which this treaty is based rather than doing what's right for the nation in the entire world republicans in the senate use this treaty to scare the hell out of their base and warn of a nameless faceless global un that they say is trying to take over the united states nothing could be further from the truth and even more ironic is that these same republicans support free trade agreements like nafta and the trans-pacific partnership which actually do threaten our sovereignty on behalf of transnational corporations it's time for some sanity you know it's. now it's turned over to our lower liberal rubble. it's was are you ready to rumble join you for tonight's long liberal rumble are francesca chambers editor and publisher at red alert politics and neil munro white
house correspondent for the daily caller thank you both for being here let's get right into this why are republicans worried about you know i understand the one world threat i understand the loss of sovereignty i mean my my father was all upset about the u.n. they're coming to get us and you know republicans but they actually are coming to get us i mean we've passed after twenty five years effort we passed a law the dolphin safe tuna law it was this is championed by the humane society of america and it got knocked down a law that we passed by a mexican corporation under nafta is why are conservatives not just crazy about nafta and the transpacific birth rates of all you said this is something that republicans are purposefully using to scare the base that's not true at all i'm someone who's obviously very familiar with the base is talking about that's what my work is revolved around and i had not even heard about this before today and this is not something that republicans are talking about you know this is not something that well i don't spend my whole entire day watching fox news since i'm
a reporter i actually try to report the news but the the thing is this is not something that that members are sending out letters on and trying to get the base riled up when and why does not this yanking this into a my group you know then this is that all too well here's the ok here's my question and neil why are republicans you know if they're genuinely concerned about american sovereignty instead of voting down a treaty to simply says the rest of the world should do what we've been doing for twenty years why don't they take. the you nafta and and put you know put a stake into the heart of this transpacific partnership before it rises in part because republicans have a new and moderate middle ground approach these. complex questions and i recognize that there's room for inconsistency and all sorts of special interest in this however that the senate's rejection of the disability makes complete sense if united states with more freedom to govern itself i'm an immigrant i came to this country not to live in this country under this country not to live under
a ward of the united nations is a country special and it should and so did for example you're opposed to treaties because they supersede the law the way i can understand that and i'm sure you know the same reason why i'm against it as well it's not specifically about this treaty or what this tree does it's about the south and i understand that and that government and you know goes back to this i don't think govern don't don't you guys think in this context and i don't actually disagree with you you know that the united states should be siding i think we should be very careful study to use because treaties supersede the law of the way and they say we could cite a treaty with canada that says whenever somebody wants a canadian food the kurds everybody in america has to you know salute or something become the law of life i mean so but what happened to america being an example of what happened to america being a leader of all the trouble we can get of the american with disabilities about twenty years ago. and she and the west we all sing kumbaya and preserve an american democracy at the same time one things don't care about leadership and fair enough i
think the one thing to watch out for these three things often are jobs programs for the professional class creating jobs for lawyers at this is not and to affect american i don't know those who have the law that we should be decent about this and remember that there are foreigners who can be damaged by these goals and we want the freedom to adjust our laws so you're saying if a company in mumbai doesn't want to accommodate disabled people that we shouldn't inflict our values on them yes and no one must be careful if you we are to enjoy our independent nation enjoying depends to and absolutely yes there are limits which we'll argue about better i don't get that that's that's not a rational argument francesca why is there not. a similar outcry on the right about these trade ino and it's kind of like what you said before there are inconsistent these with our political philosophy with our etiology just as there are inconsistent these on the i think there is you are only consistent because what neil is saying is let's not mess with foreign corporations we don't want to hurt their profitability and what these trade deals do is they help foreign corporations
in both cases average working people get screwed but this is what's helped the corporations no ice that's a very big one can fit in consistency in the sense of that you know they support the trade agreements but they don't support the sovereignty issue in this specific case but the great agreements are our surrender of sovereignty and in that case i do believe that if we're public if you believe that if the republicans believe that then we should be going to if they then they should be against them and so i'm saying there's inconsistency than the the idiology unfortunately but i but i do agree with what you had to say about you know it could have unintended consequences on the other countries some laws that we do have that they don't have to help protect i'm not you know i'm not going to go to the mat on that i mean i understand that and i understand and sort of the founders that's why it takes a super majority to pass a treaty you know but i just anyway we've done this to death i think harry reid says he wants to reform the filibuster he once again promised to do it he asked republicans to work with him on it speak to reporters on tuesday reid said we're
going to change the rules we can't continue this way i hope we can get something with the republicans it will work on this and he and jeff merkley are spearheading this effort to say that if you're going to filibuster you have to stand there and talk and just you know look at this chart shows how many record breaking filibusters we've seen since here it is those filibusters since. it's the year it doesn't so here it might be but since nine hundred sixty one ok and and then you know democrats come into office and bowing the filibuster is explode also it forty republican senators who are typically leading filibusters represent only eleven percent of americans. there you know they're from like little states like wyoming and oklahoma and and so to do with this one why should people have an percent of americans be determining the agenda of one hundred percent of those the senate was created for isn't all that they've to be able to have a voice that they wouldn't necessarily have now shut down everybody else you know they're going to play your cards you may want to minorities you know liberal or
progressive trampling over the rights of minority i mean machine the constitution says that when the sun passes something by a fifty percent majority fifty plus one fifty one percent majority it's was the way the filibuster is done because you can sort of overdone but bear in mind we're having more filibusters now because politics are moving into cultural issues where the fed chief you progressive for the federal government are trying to impose their views on every corner and of this country if they tried to do that of course they're going to get more filibusters and by the way there's an easy way to get the democrats to change their mind and filibusters who voted republican majority and you instantly both sides switch but there's a difference when democrats and going back to the one nine hundred sixty s. when democrats filibuster every single time they have been representing more than fifty percent of republicans filibuster every single time they've been representing fewer than twenty five when the democrats were filibustering they were filibustering equal opportunity for african-americans and yes times change and so
now they objected all of that was in the fifty's i'm talking about since this has. your point about the percentage of population is true but as you know we have a legal system a constitution and it was set up like this and if the democrats know what the filibuster is not the constitution the constitution was set up so that the states with less people in it would be equally represented in the senate where you could vote majority but the point being that you're saying that the you know the senate only these states only make up eleven percent of the population and you're using that as part of your is are you sort of hers and you're using that as part of your argument for why this is a terrible idea that's completely irrelevant that the constitution was set up to protect the minority as as the filibuster is not the concentration. here's the bigger point but here's the bigger point which is that when democrats were in power they supported the filibuster here it is and completely hypocritical on this issue you know going back to two thousand and five when the democrats you know were not in power he was very much in favor of it he wrote all kinds of releases on how he
was in favor of it but now they were not was he says he was whether he was going to slow them down and these very critical not hypocritical or i never meant it in the first place and he doesn't mean it now but i want to go after a majority and by the way there's again this probably the republicans conserves would agree to a fair trade majority rule senator from majority rule in the courts namely no more supreme court vetoes over democratic decisions on lifestyles relates to sex and marriage why do i think this should be the supreme court over any laws at all the team if he was you is he is not in the constitution so you would limit the courts if you do we change our laws yes i would go back to the way it was pre eighty three another shock you know break a disagreement what do you agree with if you think it's an issue if you if you want to you are be you'll be abraham lincoln thomas jefferson and the courts are probably over weeks of amazing amazing and f.d.r. also you know it was ok more of a lone liberal rubble coming up right after this break.
market why not. find out what's really happening to the global economy with mike stronger or a no holds barred look at the global financial headlines tune in to the report on our. water bag the lone liberal rumble joining me tonight are francesca chambers and neil munro let's get back to it we're going to come and you're going to come on
sometime neal and we'll just have a whole conversation about judicial review but right now what the heck is going on with republicans and you all but public holding signs that forty nine percent of republicans registered republicans nearly half believe that acorn stole the election last month for president obama acorn doesn't exist they closed down in two thousand and ten after congress stripped funding after a smear job by james o'keefe so and in addition that the same public poll found that a quarter of registered republicans want to secede from the union where they're going to go. there the libertarian paradise of somalia the people's republic of some piece of mexico i mean what i want you guys embarrassed for your parties and we recognize the full diversity of american people after every election there's a shop remember all the hollywood guys who lied to us about leaving the country after bush won we're still waiting to hear them exit the two or three of them and so the but this is only five percent of the. but you also get crazy polls
a lot of polls where people say i really don't like what happened i want to think of a reason to blame and so in this case when you ask people who are on happy about obama's victory they both blame what they can we've seen democrats do this back during the iraq campaign nineteen percent of democrats were so angry at bush they said they wanted but you had to win in effect yes no no no you know the box may have taken their poll but i don't believe the democrats actually said yes we want the enemy to we're only about one thousand percent and that's a twenty five to. zero ok you are crazy people have used another one gas crisis the point there are crazy people on both sides a quarter of your party but here's the thing it's having a party i think that most americans on either side are generally uninformed about the issues and uninformed about what's going on if you look at some of the polls that were taken before the election some of the studies that were done there were some really fantastic ones where they would go and they would ask people about
obama's stance on the issues but then they would say that those were romney's stances on the issues and obama supporters would say yeah that was a really terrible idea as you know one of them was about drones and all this korea got a lot of times i agree right but then once they revealed that it was obama's views in the people were like oh well you know obama can get a pass oh so i think there's been plenty of studies to show just the fact that on either side most people really don't understand what they're talking about on the you know i don't i don't entirely disagree with but one of the things that came out of the public policy poll that was most fascinating was that when they asked people if they thought the simpson bowles was a good idea thirty nine percent of americans said yes and then they create this this thing it was because bowles was never elected to anything he was just a clinton staffer in fact he got knocked down twice he twice he was defeated i don't know why these guys represent anybody but anyhow they said put out a burns because they used to be a clinton staffer and burns was a republican senator western state republican senator so they said well what do you think of the panetta burn. strategy twenty five percent of americans support that
thirty nine percent support simpson bowles doesn't this tell us something about polling and like true americans are and how they want to agree with that nice fellow who's asking the question you think you think that was i want to look smart i think if the issue is that they want to look smart they want to look like they're in the know yes i can remember good day let's stop and naive about this a lot of people are busy raising kids watching t.v. working and they want to participate in politics and they go no i generally agree with you and as a result of thirty five years of reaganomics both people the family are working they're having to work six jobs between the two of them yeah you know i'm totally with you but what how should this inform us those of us who are having public policy debates and in particular the people just a few blocks from here who are actually making the laws when they look at polls and they make decisions based on those polls when the polls might be just like crazy stuff and what they're reasonably aware that many times the polls are crazy but let's not restrict ourselves to ordinary americans let's look at washington and
washington believe for example you can manage the nation's health care system and the world's weather well i think they're kind of crazy but we've got degrees and television shows so nobody says a lot about us all right longshoreman the los angeles port workers are declaring a victory today this was after an eight day long strike which ended last night the strike began last month when the international longshoremen and warehouse unions local clerical workers these were jobs that were to be outsourced to india walked out of the port in fear that their jobs might be outsourced to india more than ten thousand doctors refused to cross the picket lines which closed down ten of the ports fourteen terminals slowing the delivery of billions of dollars of cargo and threatening corporate america's profits which you know you just can't have shippers of the port of promise in the clerical workers are going to keep their jobs they're not going to outsource them isn't this a great model for americans to say you know we want to keep our jobs here what evidence do you have that they were going to ship them overseas that was not the case that all they. there was no evidence to support the idea they were going to
ship them overseas they were simply afraid that their jobs might be outsourced overseas it was completely unfounded fear there was no evidence to support that and as a result then they were forced because i mean because i was reading about it earlier today that actually is a multiple article where you're saying that people who put their jobs on the line did so because they had a paranoid fantasy didn't put their jobs on the line they did when their jobs are going to arco you absolutely are putting your job on particular if not you know when you're caught in a strike and people are refusing to cross the picket lines and all that good president reagan honestly there was no evidence to support the fact that their jobs were going to be shipped overseas that was just something that they were concerned about and let's let's say for a moment that there actually was ok isn't some sort of a strike action i mean we just saw this last week in new york with the workers of mcdonald's saying you know hey you know seven dollars and twenty five cents an hour you know the average age of workers in the fast food industry new york city is twenty eight times the percentage of that sixteen year old i'm sympathetic to the
wal-mart strikes i'm sympathetic to some sort of a mcdonald's strike where the issue is wages they're not being paid as much as they should be that i'm very sympathetic to having you know obviously worked at a target or you know all that stuff growing up as well and trying to make ends meet when i was in college very sympathetic to a straight based on treatment and wages who have been thrown out of your party i'm sympathetic to that i'm not saying that i support it one hundred percent i'm saying i'm sympathetic to a strike based on those reasons but for something that they don't even know is happening might not even happen could be shipped overseas you know that that is something that i'm not sympathetic with for that reason but then it's a larger point this is a vast and complex economy these are highly productive workers you can see the cranes you can see the containers we can afford small blocks of inefficiency because it makes americans more and more money they live a better life but this is an argument for having a high tech highly productive country not a country based on the. labor as we have now with immigration policy on low skilled
labor based on the terrible schools and we can manage a broad based terrible education trade policy that moves all of that is that for so many of. the maybe don't fix to the question of international trade we can modify a fix we just says this is george bush said you know we don't need no strength a.b.m. treaty the president can say we don't need no stinking trade treaty yes he could and that would cost enormous numbers of jobs in certain sectors no. millions of jobs and it would create millions of jobs however we would also and up driving up prices we would be we would have more jobs but we would all be poorer there may be a better one to do it we would have more jobs and we would all be richer used to be richer than we are now ages were higher he was a dancer if you reach her and we would strip the supply of labor and increase productivity so like at the end of you in return you drive up wages well you can restrict the supply of labor you know and historically that's been done but the
easiest way to restrict the supply of labor is to make sure that the demand for labor is greater than supply of labor and you do that by bringing those factor we've lost fifty thousand factories the last ten years bring those factories back here have a labor shortage what's going to do it's going to drive wages up wages go up people going to more some more disposable income is going to stimulate the economy the country grows it happened from the one nine hundred forty s. until the one nine hundred eighty s. and then reaganomics came along and for thirty two years we've seen the sky drive going forward to do that you have to make that you have to make a policy decision that you would restrict the supply of labor otherwise bringing more factories in would just bring in more workers from around the world so if you all of you mean force immigration will actually enforce the law. you know you could argue that if you're competing and you don't want to do this debate here for i just want obviously all reagan's fault so yeah well you know they're only i don't want to you know i started with. the only other thing i want to do you know get on the story because i would be sympathetic if it were from or for other reasons but those weren't the reasons and now it's being. what's happening because of this is that
those those ports are being held hostage to the point where now that the agreement includes these workers being given tenure there for the rest of their life and that stops them from being able to get rid of people if they don't need as many workers if there's technology that comes along with the faster it was no zero point zero we're talking about forty or fifty people but are going to being that but the point being that now they cannot fire those people because those people have jobs for life want to basically hire those who did it tell your sister they can fire them the agreement was that they wouldn't on their jobs to india you know the agreement was that they would give them jobs for the rest of their life they have tenure there for the rest their life now that was what was part of their agreement you know it's not i'm sorry your master but our problem is hurricane sandy thirty thousand people are still without power twenty one hundred families are still on the most distance sixty seven hundred billions in new york city are still at the moment still need work to be habitable the president is calling in his fiscal cliff negotiations for some stimulus spending doesn't hurricane sandy prove we need it here's an opportunity to. take this we have a few minutes every year of warden
a trillion dollars in deficit spending at this point the president obama is like a doctor running a thousand votes with a patient who is not recovery yet if there's an argument for spending more to help the people who were damaged when the federal weather service didn't warn them about the incoming storm but the larger point is this country has been following that policy for so long that we are near because if we did come you know did warn them about it and the wheels are coming off because since the reagan administration we have not been spending money on infrastructure in the united states look around you most of the infrastructure was built in the fifty's sixty's seventy's and early eighty's and then we. spend it on government run health care going to star wars which is four trillion dollars is not to blame for what's actually happening in new york because of the storms right now and the money that it's not about actually not true part of the infrastructure is these giant dunes that they put out in front and now some of this is nimby stuff because there were so. neighborhoods that we don't want the stinking doings we want to see the ocean and those are the neighborhoods
ago wiped out the neighborhoods with the dunes they get wiped out and that may be more true. i but i think that was the result of what's actually happening with a lot of these people still being power out of their homes and whatever else actually i mean infrastructure in the sense that they don't have hotels there that they can put them in so they have to keep them in their homes now and that's costing a lot of money to renovate the homes more quickly than they would normally push this process along and so there's a lot of other issues at play here specifically because of the area in which i happen and that would have played all these homes had solar panels on their roofs like like about seventy percent of homes in germany do right now all these homes that filipinos there would not use they'd be wiped off in the. sort of a kind of this very well bolted. in a way no matter what you say none of it makes any difference because the environmental lawyers the civil rights lawyers you name it lawyers you arbitragers a conflict would prevent the construction of the roads and the. berms you want for example the president believed in the two thousand and eight nine stimulus that he
had lots of shovel ready construction to do it turned out you know the shovels were held back by the lawyers by the environmental reviews so if you know wilkins fighting so if you want to have these good old fashioned construction manufacturing jobs you're going to have to roll and fire a whole pile of post-graduate lawyers civil rights guys because i'm with you neil munro francesca chambers thank you both for being with us to. hire the lawyers shakespeare first kill all the lawyers. i realize. it was me coming up as gun control becomes such a touchy and heated issue in america that the word gun itself deserves a place in george carlin's famous seven dirty words sketch. submit.